Fort Collins Citycouncilmember Diggs Brown has been called back to active duty with the Colorado National Guard in November. He's a Green Beret Major, and will be based out of Germany as part of the Special Operations Command, Africa.
Aside from concerns about missing council votes, Brown has to worry
about his home, his pet bird and his business—he works as a financial
adviser.
Brown, who served in Afghanistan in 2002 and wrote a
book about his experiences, is headed back to action Oct. 26. He’ll be
based in Germany, working with Special Operations Command Africa. It
may seem like short notice, but Brown said he wasn’t surprised.
“I’m
glad I’ve known about this coming down the stretch for about a month
now, so I can sort of get prepared, especially mentally,” he said.
“You’ve got to get your will updated, get all those powers of attorney
out there, get your house in order, your business.”
He said
friends will keep an eye on his home, and friends and family who come
to town will be able to use it — as long as they clean up after
themselves so it’s “not icky,” he said with a laugh.
But he’ll miss those friends and contacts; though e-mail and Internet phones allow him to stay in touch, it’s not the same.
“That’s
probably what I am going to miss the most, is the great relationships
I’ve made in Fort Collins, not being able to see them face to face ...
I’m going to miss that,” he said. “When you think about it, there are
things you take for granted. I can get up in the middle of the night,
go to my refrigerator, get a Gatorade or a snack, and I can take a hot
shower when I want, I am free to come and go as I please. All of that
changes.”
He said he wanted to stress that two other Fort
Collins residents in his National Guard unit are also being deployed,
and his situation is only unique because of his role as an elected
official.
“I’m flattered with the attention this is getting,
but there are a lot of other guys and gals out there doing the same
thing,” he said. “I’m sure it’s a story because I’m a council member,
but I’m not alone in this.”
Some of Diggs' friends are selling bracelets (similar to those "Livestrong" bracelets) to help support Diggs' favorite City Council initiative, the construction of the Veterans Plaza at the new Spring Canyon Community Park in Fort Collins. The bracelets are inscribed with: "Major B. Diggs Brown, Jr., Northern Colorado Hero" and the net proceeds will go to the park construction.
If you want a bracelet, send me an e-mail. (They're $5).
Below is my column for this weekend's edition of Fort Collins Now. It focuses on the Presidential race, but it applies to all levels of office.
This election hinges on some very basic questions: Higher taxes or lower taxes? More government or less government? When times are tough, who should decide how to spend the money you earn?
What the column makes clear is that for all of the rhetoric, the numbers don't lie: Barack Obama and the Democrats are calling for higher taxes, the kind of taxes that kill job creation, threaten retirement savings and, in some cases, are painfully regressive - taking more money, job security and opportunity from those who can least afford it.
Here's Friday's column:
My Closing Argument (temporary title)
by Andrew Boucher
I had a shocking conversation
with a well-informed voter the other day.She asked about Barack Obama’s “tax cut for 95 percent of Americans.”I laughed, noting that it was going to be
quite a trick to give a “tax cut” to the roughly 40 percent of Americans who
don’t pay federal income taxes.
“What?”She asked.
It stopped me dead in my
tracks.“After deductions, about 40
percent of Americans don’t end up owing income taxes,” I explained.“Barack Obama’s idea of a ‘tax cut’ for them
is to send them a ‘refundable tax credit.’In other words, he’s going to cut everyone a government check.”(“Spread the wealth around,” indeed.)
We’re days away from a
national election, and no one in the media has even bothered to explain Barack
Obama’s “tax cut.”No one has broken
down just what Barack Obama is proposing and what it will mean for you, your
family budget, your retirement savings, and your job security.
Obama’s tax plan includes
four main components: Higher marginal rates; higher estate taxes; higher corporate
taxes; and higher taxes on investments.Let’s go through them, one-by-one.
Start with the now-famous
“Joe the Plumber” tax which would raise taxes on income over $250,000.(Is it $250,000?Obama’s new ad now clearly says
$200,000.Just this week, Joe Biden said
it was $150,000.So who really knows?It seems to be dropping daily.)According to the Wall Street Journal, the
combined Obama tax plan would “add up to about a 10-percentage-point hike in
marginal tax rates for those making more than $250,000 a year, including
millions of small businesses that pay taxes at individual rates.”
And there’s the problem.The “Joe the Plumber” tax raises taxes on
small businesses, crushing entrepreneurial job creation at the most basic
level.Most small businesses are LLC’s
or S-Corporations.Every net dollar they
earn is taxed as “income” for the owner.Even if a small business owner decides to take a small salary each year
and leave money in his or her business for future investment or payroll, all of
that money is taxed as “personal income”.Moreover, many small businesses live from contract to contract.They might receive a large check at the end
of a year and then set that money aside to make sure they can make payroll for
upcoming lean months.Obama’s plan
raises taxes on that money, perversely calling it “income”.In the real world, that money is often next
month’s paycheck or next year’s job security for employees.
Barack Obama is also calling
for higher estate taxes: More “tax the rich” class warfare, more real-world pain
for working Americans.The current estate
tax rate is scheduled to sunset over the next few years.Barack Obama will set it at 45 percent.For Bill Gates and Warren Buffet, that might
not be that big a deal, but what about a family farm or small business?Many are worth enough to trigger the estate tax
but only produce a modest income for the owners.Those farms or businesses are taxed at the
“value” of the company, not for the revenue they produce.All too often, the only way the next
generation can cover their estate tax bill is to sell off the farm or
business.Most “Mom and Pop” small
businesses don’t survive to the next generation.The estate tax destroys them.
But what if you don’t own a
small family business, don’t work for a small family business or don’t shop at
small family businesses?Well, do your
parents own their home?If they passed
away, would you be able to write a check to cover the estate taxes on the value
of that home, or would you have to put it on the market in order to pay the government?On December 31, 2010, the estate tax is
scheduled to expire.Barack Obama wants
to set it to 45 percent for the highest marginal rates.Part of the American Dream is that our
children will live better than we do, that we’ll be able to create something
and pass it on.Barack Obama’s tax plan makes
that dream unattainable for many Americans.
Barack Obama will raise taxes
on “big oil.”Who do you think actually
pays for those taxes on “big oil”?We
do, of course.Everyone pays, regardless
of whether or not we can afford it.We
pay higher prices at the gas pump and higher prices for our groceries. (It
takes gas to run farm equipment and the trucks that get the groceries to the
supermarket.)Barack Obama’s higher
taxes on “big oil” will hurt lower-income Americans the most.While they might make for a nice sound bite,
taxes on “big oil” are among the most regressive and punitive taxes.Remember those 40 percent who don’t owe
federal income taxes? Ironically, Barack
Obama’s plan means they take less money home at the end of the week.
Finally, a question: How’s
your 401k these days?Your pension?Stocks have plummeted as investors have
pulled their money out of the market.Yet just as the market is crashing, Barack Obama is planning to raise
taxes on capital gains and dividends, further discouraging investment and
cutting an even larger chunk of money out of the stock market.Were you planning on retiring anytime
soon?Under an Obama administration, you
might be working a few extra years.
We’ve seen this type of “tax
the rich” mentality before.In 1989,
President George H.W. Bush and the Democrat-controlled Congress passed a ten
percent “luxury tax” on yachts priced at more than $100,000, thinking that the
“rich” would easily be able to afford the surcharge.What happened?Just two years after the new tax went into
effect, the New York Times reported that “In the last two years, about 100
builders of luxury boats -- recreational craft costing more than $100,000 --
cut their operations severely and laid off thousands of workers.”
Thousands of workers lost
their jobs: Machinists, tradesmen, carpenters, laborers, designers. The “tax the rich” mentality – especially
higher taxes on business – sends lower and middle income workers to the
unemployment office.Higher estate taxes
destroy the ability to pass small businesses, family farms or homes on to the
next generation.Higher taxes on “big
oil” lead to regressive cost increases at the gas pump and the grocery checkout
lane.Higher taxes on investments leads
to reduced values for retirement accounts, 401k’s and pensions.
That is what Barack Obama is
proposing.That is his change for
America.Look at it this way: Maybe you
can use your government check – oops, I mean “refundable tax credit” – to pay for
it all.You might even want to spend it
on some new resume paper.You’re going
to need it.
Your Larimer County Commissioners serve as both the legislative and
executive branches of county government, voting to pass laws and
overseeing the functions of government. They are responsible for taxes
and how those tax dollars are spent. They make critical decisions on
land-use issues and economic development in the county. They are
responsible for making sure the roads are paved and plowed.
This year, two of the three County Commissioner seats are up for election. The balance of the commission is at stake.
I really can't stress this enough: Larimer County, Colorado has the best-run elections in the country. (Considering that we're the purplest county in the purplest state in America these days, that's a good thing.)
If the election is close, Larimer County could be the Florida of 2008,
except, of course, that we actually know how to run elections here.
The
mess in Florida in 2000 was an eye-opener for many Americans to the
underside of our election system. The presidential election came down
to people trying to determine “voter intent” based on whether or not a
small piece of paper was punched out of a card.
But in 2000,
such methods weren't unique to Florida. In 1998, I walked into the town
clerk's office in a small New Hampshire town, asked for the voter file,
and was given a copy of a hand-written ledger (the dead people had been
crossed out). In the old system of precinct-specific voters, volunteers
set up folding tables in the community center, worked from a printed
voter file and crossed off names of voters one by one as they came
through the line.
Not anymore. Not in Larimer County. Today
our system of voting is more efficient, more reliable and more secure
than ever before. If the 2008 election does indeed come down to Larimer
County, Colorado, we're in good hands. In fact, Scott Doyle, our
Larimer County Clerk and Recorder—the guy in charge of running our
elections—was named “Public Official of the Year” by the National
Association of County Recorders, Election Officials and Clerks in 2005.
So how does an election work in Larimer County? What types of safeguards are in place to ensure that your ballot is counted?
From my Fort Collins Now column on September 26: Prior to being reactivated into the Colorado National Guard, City Councilman Diggs Brown was able to pass "NoCOST".
Last month, City Councilmember Diggs Brown started asking questions
... spending questions. Unfortunately, he wasn't able to get some
simple questions answered. So he set out to change the city's
expenditure reporting system. He did his own research, put together a
proposal, and within a few days had presented—and passed—NoCOST, the
Northern Colorado Spending Transparency act. By June 2009, Fort Collins
residents will have a way to keep track of how government spends their
money. The program will cost less than $10,000 to implement and will
most likely pay for itself as ordinary residents help identify cost
savings. City contracts that go out to bid will now have greater
competition and lower costs: vendors and suppliers will be able to
compete for contracts in a transparent marketplace.
“The
citizens have a right to know how tax dollars are being spent,” Brown
said. “After all, it's their money. Taxpayers need to be confident that
there is a high level of transparency and accountability in their
municipal government.”
Larimer County Clerk and Recorder Scott Doyle has warned that if you
wait until Election Day, you should “bring a lunch.” So in the spirit
of civic duty, I've compiled a handy voter's guide for the ballot
questions. (It works both ways, of course. If you tend to disagree with
this column, just vote the opposite of my recommendations. I'm here to
help.)
For the sake of sanity and space, I'm only going to comment on a few of these… « Amendment 46 would end race-based preferences for state hiring, contracts and public education. (Yes.)
« Amendment 47 would allow you to work at a unionized company without being forced to join a union. (Yes.)
« Amendment 48 would define the word “person” as beginning at fertilization.
«
Amendment 49 would prohibit governments from automatically deducting
union dues from employees' paychecks. (Yes. Government shouldn't be the
bag-man for unions.)
« Amendment 50 would expand gambling in Central City, Black Hawk and Cripple Creek by extending hours and raising bet limits.
« Amendment 51 would raise taxes to fund developmental disabilities.
«
Amendment 52 would use a portion of the severance tax to fund
transportation. (Yes. This would use an existing tax to pay for
desperately-needed road improvements.)
« Amendment 53 would make
business leaders liable for the actions of their companies. (No. This
would crush job-creation in Colorado. Would you be willing to start a
business if a slip-and-fall lawsuit could take your family's house and
your life savings?)
« Amendment 54 would prohibit campaign contributors from receiving state contracts.
«
Amendment 55 would require employers to establish “just cause” to fire
someone. (No. Your boss would have to produce documentation to the
government in order to fire that slacker sitting in the next cubicle?
Do you want the government to tell companies who they can and can't
fire?)
« Amendment 56 would require companies of 20 employees or
more to provide health insurance. (No. Companies aren't bottomless
wells of cash. In the real world, when the cost of providing a job goes
up, the number of jobs goes down. This is a recipe for higher
unemployment.)
« Amendment 57 would allow injured employees to
sue above and beyond the workers' compensation system. (No. We have a
workers' comp system for a reason: so we don't tie up our economy with
endless lawsuits. When workers get hurt on the job, there's a system
that takes care of them already.)
« Amendment 58 would raise
severance taxes to fund college scholarships. (No. This raises taxes on
oil and gas. Who ends up paying those taxes? You. At the gas pump.)
«
Amendment 59 would increase education funding by 1 percent each year
and pay for it with the Tabor refund. Referendum L would lower the age
of serving in the state legislature to 21. Referenda M and N would
remove outdated and obsolete provisions from the constitution.
«
Finally, Referendum O would make it harder to get amendments and
referenda on the ballot. (Yes. This might just be the best idea of the
bunch.)
I am about to perform a major public service for the city of Fort Collins. Ready? Here we go:
Turn
off the lights when you leave a room. (What? Do you think we own stock
in the electric company?) Lower that thermostat setting in the winter.
(Put on a sweater. Who said you had a God-given right to walk around in
bare feet in the winter anyway?) Take shorter showers. (The rest of the
family wants to be able to have some hot water, too.)
Sound
familiar? Who knew we all had “green” moms? In my house, it was called
“common sense.” Our thermostat was set in the low-60s in the winter.
With five older sisters, I learned early to take short showers. We had
a large garden. We froze and canned some vegetables in the fall. We
bought food in bulk (there were nine of us). We closed the door behind
us so we didn't “let the heat out.” We split our own firewood and grew
some of our own Christmas trees. Heck we even made our own maple syrup
for our pancakes. Who knew that the Boucher household was the model of
“sustainability?” We thought we were “conservative.”
Today,
there is an army of bureaucrats in our nanny city to make sure
that—just in case you didn't have a mother—you get the same sort of
common sense advice.
The conclusion...
Better yet, the city of Fort Collins can hire my mom. Heck, let's hire
a whole brigade of moms. They'll come to your home, sit down at your
kitchen table, have a cup of coffee, ask you about your kids, and then
lecture you for a couple of hours: “Turn off the light when you leave a
room—do you think we own stock in the electric company?”
How did we ever survive before government started telling us how to live our lives?
